Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I was talking to this climatologist the other day and he was talking about global warming. I was like "dude, what about the sun? It's the sun stupid" and he was like "holy poo, I never thought of that!" And then I was like "even more, man.....volcanoes" and he was like "damn dude, you're completely blowing my mind right now, I need to re-evaluate EVERYTHING."

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

well we all know scientists only act like nerds all through school, go years between dates to get in more study and lab time, etc. only to come up with ideas to get grant money.

really people should hang around some geologists or climatologists. they're fuging super nerds who've devoted their lives to those pursuits. they generally aren't light, easy subjects that average people with average motivations in life just kind of decide to get PhDs in as a money-making scheme.

i don't know what makes it so easy for joe internet to dismiss climate scientists when you probably wouldn't find him first in line to argue with an aerospace engineer about the best way to design a jet engine.

Link to post

Share on other sites

So what part of the science are you disputing? Do you think CO2 levels are not actually rising/ have nothing to do with human activity? Do you not believe atmospheric CO2 acts as a greenhouse gas in the atmosphere?

There have been plenty of flawed scientific theories throughout history which have been proven wrong, but they weren't proved wrong by somebody saying, "well I dont care what evidence you have, other scientists were wrong before you so I dont believe anything you have to say"

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

CO2 being a greenhouse gas is no more in dispute than CFCs cause a breakdown of O3.

The catch for the latter is justifying how a heavier-than-air molecule gets miles above the surface to perform this breakdown. Yet is was accepted as a slam dunk for anyone in the know about science just two decades ago.

Now the crux of arguments that have yet to be made is just how significant is anthropomorphic contributions to global temperature with respect to all other variance that we know of. If what scientific inquiry has found is true, then the earth has gone through several cycles of warming and cooling LONG before people inhabited it. There are DEMONSTRATED accounts of variance of solar activity, volcanic activity, and oceanic activity that FAR OUTWEIGH anthropomorphic CO2 emissions.

Any climatologist that claims otherwise is a fraud. Hell, the trajectories that were projected just a decade ago are NOTHING CLOSE to what they claimed. Tom Brokaw ran with that widely accepted view and proclaimed that NYC would be underwater by this time due to rising sea levels due to global warming.

I would suggest reading State of Fear by Michael Creighton. His 20 page bibliography from a decade ago does FAR MORE actual research than that picture book by Al Gore that is still touted as indisputable science.

So the question remains, with everything that we were SO SURE about in the past and turned out to be SO WRONG about, are we certain that we should support policies that clearly have ulterior motives that have nothing to do with environmental concerns? Europe has already seen hundreds of billions of dollars exchange hands due to the carbon credit scam. Who made out the best? Surprise! Politicians!